Direction, evidence grade, and study type are AI-generated labels (gpt-5-mini), not human-verified. Syntheses are LLM-written. "Tensions" are machine-detected candidates, not confirmed contradictions. A research-acceleration tool, not peer review.
How this is built →
2Distinct papers
2Unique collaborators
2/2Semantic Scholar citation coverage
Publication span: 2026. Corpus fetch span: 2026.
Identity provenance
Provider IDs
- Semantic Scholar:
2374147902
ORCID evidence
No valid ORCID is stored.
Observed aliases (1)
- Mohammed Sayagh (semantic scholar, provider refresh)
Topics and outcomes in this view
Assessment themes
- Human Ai Collab: 2 papers
- Productivity: 2 papers
- Org Design: 1 paper
Claim outcomes
- Output Quality: 2 papers
- Organizational Efficiency: 2 papers
- Other: 2 papers
- Adoption Rate: 1 paper
- Developer Productivity: 1 paper
- Task Allocation: 1 paper
- Task Completion Time: 1 paper
Papers in the Semantic Scholar view
Latest stored Semantic Scholar author observations only. Citation counts below are from the same provider and are not combined with other services.
Scroll the table horizontally to see every column.
| Paper | Author evidence | Date | Provider citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Instruction files for code-writing AI are hit-or-miss: in an analysis of 15,549 agentic pull requests across 148 projects, only 27.7% of projects raised merge rates by at least 20% after adding instructions while 26.4% fell—projects that gained tended to use longer, more structured instructions.arxiv | Mohammed Sayagh provider id |
2026-06-11 | 0 |
| Nearly half of AI-generated code fixes are rejected, creating substantial review and validation waste; a qualitative analysis of 306 non-merged PRs identifies 14 failure reasons and recommends better guidance, constraints, and CI-aware validation to curb wasted effort.arxiv | Mohammed Sayagh provider id |
2026-06-11 | 1 |
Citation observation summary
Semantic Scholar supplied counts for 2 of 2 papers in this view; 0 are missing. The observed paper counts sum to 1 cumulative citations. This is a coverage summary, not an author score or h-index.